Most individuals don’t imagine me after I inform them this, however it’s true: In 2010, I used to be educating my introductory course in American Nationwide Authorities on a campus in South Carolina when — and I don’t fairly recall precisely what introduced it on — I mentioned to my class, “Inside our lifetimes, a actuality TV star might be elected president of the USA.” But even I by no means imagined that the host of The Apprentice would change into president solely seven years later.
Once I educate that American Authorities course, I attempt to persuade college students to take their citizenship significantly. It’s a homily now 1000’s of scholars have heard me give in a few years for 14 weeks at a time. The lads who wrote this Structure and the untold thousands and thousands who’ve given their lives in order that “authorities of the individuals, by the individuals, for the individuals shall not perish from the earth” all assumed we at all times would dwell as much as their expectations and vote in line with our pursuits. The promise of democracy is that we every carry just a little little bit of rational deliberation about what’s greatest for me and my group to the poll field.
So, I’m sure I used to be lamenting the state of American politics in that classroom. I do know I used to be making an attempt to convey to my college students simply how little the calculation of rational self-interest figures into a whole lot of voter habits, how dangerous the state of our politics is that it appeared even thinkable at that second for a very unqualified actuality TV character to carry the workplace as soon as held by Washington, by Lincoln, by each Roosevelts. Nevertheless it had change into thinkable.
And, then it occurred.
It’s for all these causes right now (and with the data that I known as Donald Trump’s election years earlier than it occurred) that I look upon George Santos with despair.
You might be tempted to learn this as a joke about George Santos (R-N.Y.) placing “president of the USA” on his resume. However I’m not joking. I’m apprehensive that Santos — or one other charlatan identical to him — can change into president of the USA someday. In precisely the identical manner I mentioned it in 2010, I imply to say right now — it ought to appear unthinkable, nevertheless it isn’t. And that’s precisely what worries me.
Once I speak in school about the truth that too many people don’t vote the way in which that the individuals who gave us this political system hoped we might, what I’m actually speaking about is unfavourable partisanship. For too many citizens, who a candidate is or what a celebration will do as soon as they achieve energy appears to matter considerably lower than merely defeating the opposite get together.
Our politics is so polarized right now, simply profitable is sufficient.
For voters whose imaginations have been captured by the sport of partisan politics, the truth that their vote the truth is yields outcomes in opposition to their pursuits doesn’t make any distinction. The phenomenon has been documented at the very least since Thomas Frank’s 2004 ebook, “What’s the Matter with Kansas?” However we all know additionally that the way in which the Trump administration ruled in opposition to COVID mitigation and vaccination has made victims largely of Trump voters.
It’s a perversion of democracy, individuals voting in opposition to their very own pursuits solely in order that they’ll really feel the fleeting triumph of beating the opposite facet. However right here we’re.
And that is what brings me to George Santos.
Good questions are being requested about how Santos received his seat within the U.S. Home of Representatives. Simply this week he revised a marketing campaign submitting to replicate {that a} $500,000 mortgage to his marketing campaign was not his cash, a truth that just about actually will put him below additional authorized scrutiny. All that can play out by itself, in its personal time.
For us, there are different inquiries to ask.
We would ask, ‘How is it that cash has a lot energy in our political system, that it may make such an clearly unsuitable candidate not solely aggressive however victorious?’
We would ask, ‘Why is it that voter and journalistic curiosity in candidates for the Home of Representatives could possibly be so low that Santos’s fabulous resume bought no sustained scrutiny till after Election Day?’
We would ask, ‘What has occurred to the most important political events whose job (in line with all of the political science textbooks) is to display screen and vet candidates for workplace?’
We would ask, ‘How craven is the slim majority of Home Republicans and Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) that they’d seat and maintain Santos of their convention, figuring out he’s a safety threat, just because they wanted his vote to maintain Hakeem Jeffries from the speakership?’
These all are good questions, and there are different good one too. All of them level to critical issues in our political system.
However probably the most major problem of all is that too many citizens appear to benefit from the leisure of our politics a bit an excessive amount of — having fun with it, sure, on the expense of ‘the opposite facet’ but additionally at their very own expense.
George Washington warned us in his Farewell Handle that our urge for food to defeat the opposite facet may lead us to spoil. The writers of The Federalist Papers felt certain they’d given us each safety they may in opposition to electing these with “Abilities for low intrigue.” However we all know the hazard is right here, it’s clear, and it’s current.
And for so long as that is still true, we can’t dismiss the likelihood that George Santos or another person fairly like him will be president of the USA. We must replicate on that soberly and at size now, tomorrow, and each time we vote.
Steven P. Millies, a political theorist, is professor of public theology and director of The Bernardin Heart at Catholic Theological Union in Chicago. Observe him on Twitter @stevenpmillies